cAPHC010073932022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3458] THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION NO: 4699/2022 Between: Nelatur Somashekar and Others ...PETITIONER(S) AND The State Of Andhra Pradesh and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner(S): 1. CH VENKAT RAMAN Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR SERVICES II 2. V.DYUMANI (SC for TTD) The Court made the following: ORDER:- Heard Sri Ch.Venkat Raman, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Government Pleader for Services II and V.Dyumani, learned Standing Counsel for TTD. 2. Challenging the resolutions of the 3rd respondent for incorporating the 5th respondent as a Corporation under the Companies Act 2013, the present writ petition is filed. 2 3. The writ petition filed by the petitioner Nos. 3, 14, 51 and 83 vide order dated 23.11.2022, petitioner Nos.7, 18, 27, 59, 65 vide order dated 30.01.2024 and the petitioner No. 52 vide order dated 20.09.2024 was dismissed as withdrawn. 4. The impugned proceedings are resolutions of the Board granting approval to create a Manpower Corporation to deal with societies/agencies/contract employees and migrate them to the newly incorporated Corporation. 5. It is contended that the TTD Board vide resolution dated 19.06.2021 and 07.10.2021 has approved incorporation of a Company in the name of the 5th respondent. 6. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioners who are ‘purohits’ formed a ‘sangham’ and entered into MOU with the 3rd respondent way back on 23.06.1952. The said ‘sangham’ came into being to provide service to the pilgrims at ‘Pushkarini’, ‘Papavinasanam’ etc. Under the said MOU, the 3rd respondent has power to admit new ‘purohits’ to the ‘sangham’ to function as a ‘purohit’ in the Tirumala Hills. Subject to 3/4th members of the ‘sangham’ agree for it. The said MOU was revised vide resolution dated 20.11.2000, to the effect that the total collection out of the sale of tickets for the services shall be deposited in the Bank and a record shall be maintained for the amounts so received and the ‘purohits’ should not conduct the poojas, rituals without the valid tickets. No extra amount other than the cost of ticket should be collected by the members of the ‘sangham’. 3 7. The said MOU was further amended on 14.12.2005 by the 3rd respondent. Pursuant to the said amendment, it was agreed that 75% of the collections on sale of tickets would be paid to the ‘purohit sangham’ at the end of every month and the expenditure on the pay and allowances of the Shroffs would be paid by the TTD. Yet again Vide proceedings dated 03.05.2010, the 4th respondent has proposed to enhance the remuneration to the members of the ‘purohit sangham’. Where under it was provided that Rs.5,000/- would be paid to the each member of the ‘sangham’ and the entire collections on sale of these tickets would be remitted to the ‘purohit sangham’ without retaining the same by the TTD at 25%. 8. Thereafter, vide proceedings dated 02.11.2012 of the 3rd respondent, certain facilities were also extended to the members of the ‘purohit sangham’ viz., medical cards, laddu cards and ID cards etc. Further the members were also allowed causal leave of 15 days and special leave for 25 days etc. 9. Thereafter, the TTD vide resolution dated 26.05.2011 has resolved to fix a remuneration of 15,000/- and Rs.10,000/- per month to each member of the ‘purohit sangham’. In addition the other ‘sangham’ viz., ear boring achari sangham, S.V.D.N.I.A Welfare Association were also extended the similar benefits. Therefore, the entire collections received on sale of tickets at ‘purohit sangham’ were credited to TTD account. On account of the new facilities extended by the TTD to the members of the ‘purohit sangham’, the MOU entered between TTD and consequently the ‘purohit sangham’ was 4 annulled. Following of the annulment of the MOU, the 5th respondent has extended the medical facilities to the family dependents of the ‘purohit sangham’, ‘Melam’ staff, ‘ear boring’ staff etc. 10. It is contended that the 2nd respondent authorities vide proceedings dated 25.10.2021 have incorporated the 5th respondent Corporation in terms of the Companies Act, 2013. As per the Memorandum of Association, the 5th respondent corporation supplies manpower services to the TTD. 11. It is contended that the consequent upon creation of the 5th respondent Corporation, the services of the petitioners were transferred to the 5th respondent and their conditions of service would now be regulated by the 5th respondent Corporation. It is contended that the creation of 5th respondent Corporation is against all cannons of law. The Government of Andhra Pradesh has earlier issued many numbers of G.O’s for absorption of the services of the contract workers. However, now the Board has taken a decision to create a Corporation on similar lines of A.P.C.O.S. It is contended that the creation of the 5th respondent Company is detrimental to the interests of the petitioners. Since 1952, the services of the ‘purohit sangham’ are under supervision of TTD and there were several MOUs entered from time to time between the ‘purohit sangham’ and TTD, the present proceedings of the TTD incorporating the 5th respondent is only to defraud the interests of the petitioners and the similarly situated service providers viz., ear boring, Melam 5 staff etc. Thus, the petitioners sought for setting aside of the impugned proceedings, consequently, the creation of the 5th respondent. 12. The 2nd to 4th and 6th to 8th respondents filed counter affidavit contending that the impugned proceedings are issued in day to day administration of TTD. And also the petitioners have no locus to challenge the same and the proceedings dated 07.10.2021 is relating to creation of Manpower Corporation to deal with contract employees and the other societies. There was never any ‘employer – employee’ relationship between the petitioners and the TTD. It is further contended that there is no post of ‘purohit’ in TTD. These ‘purohits’ were rendering services at Tirumala on their own volition and in order to regulate them and in order to have a streamlined services to the pilgrims, an MOU was entered with them. The services rendered by ‘purohits’ are different from those of ‘archakas’ and there is no post of ‘purohit’ in TTD, and the same is not a sanctioned post. These ‘purohits’ perform abhishekams, vratams, marriages and ‘upanayanams’ at the request of the pilgrims at the ‘purohit sangham’ building. The amounts received towards the said services by sale of such service tickets would be deposited to the credit of TTD after taking their share. In order to streamline the religious activities performed by these ‘purohits’, the MOUs were entered and the same were amended from time to time as required. The TTD was always monitoring the activities of the petitioners and the petitioners were not on the pay roles of the TTD and they cannot seek for equal pay for equal work or nor they are entitled for regularization. And the petitioners cannot challenge 6 the creation of 5th Respondent Corporation and they have no locus to challenge the same, which is incorporated and it is further stated that TTD has taken a policy decision not to take any services from private societies for supply of man power. Therefore, created the 5th respondent having a transparent independent administration. It is further stated that the vide resolution dated 07.10.2021 the Internal Committee recommended for certain benefits to those who migrate to the 5th respondent corporation. Since the petitioners were never on the roles of the TTD and that they have been rendering their services on their own to the pilgrims and thus they cannot seek for any regularization of their services. 13. Considered the rival submissions. 14. The 5th respondent Company is incorporated under the provisions of Section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013. The Memorandum of Association of the Company specifies the objects of the Company. A perusal of the said objects, reflects that the objects are to promote health and social activities in India, intended for general welfare of manpower on contract or outsourcing basis that includes recruiting, selecting, interviewing etc., all types of manpower. It further specifies that any other type of supply manpower including manpower relating to religious, vocational, artistic, artisan, fine arts etc., as required by TTD or any other organization, department and institution. The object of providing vocational, religious, artistic and such of those services as required by TTD appears to be ancillary objects. 7 15. As seen from the pre-incorporation resolutions of the TTD which intended to incorporate an establishment to cater to the needs and requirement of TTD, whereas, in the stated objects of the 5th respondent Company, a distinction was made between religious and non-religious staff by using the term 'religious,' implying that other services rendered by other groups would not or may not strictly constitute associated with the Hindu faith and custom. 16. Therefore, it is evident from the stated objectives of the 5th respondent that it does not appear to have been solely incorporated to serve the manpower needs of TTD. Rather, its objectives are general in nature. At the same time, the primary focus of the 5th respondent appears to be the promotion of health and social welfare activities in India aimed at the general welfare of manpower engaged on a contractual or outsourced basis. Besides, a distinction was sought to be made between a religious staff and other staff by explicitly using the word “religious”, implying that the services of artisans, artists, and community-based vocational services, as not intended for Hindu religious practices. Therefore, there is every possibility that the 5th respondent may supply the manpower service of its choice without regard to the religious faith and practice of the Devasthanam. At this juncture, it is appropriate to refer to the decision of this Court in Syama Prasad Mukherjee Gollapudi Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh and another. 8 17. For the above reasons, the objects of the 5th respondent are not in furtherance of the objects of the TTD. The contractual/outsourced workforce of the TTD shall not be transferred and brought under the umbrella of the 5th respondent. And the same is hit by the judgment of this Court in W.P.No.6281 of 2021 in the case of Syama Prasad Mukherjee Gollapudi Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh and another. However, this Court is not inclined to issue mandamus directing the 3rd respondent to regularise the services of the petitioners, treating them as regular employees of the TTD, having regard to the fact that they were not appointed against the sanctioned post, they have been rendering their services pursuant to Memorandum of Understanding and in the light of the submission made by the TTD that there is no sanctioned post of Purohit. 18. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, interlocutory applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. ____________________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date:17.04.2025 ANI After pronouncement of orders in the case, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners requests the Court to direct the respondents to issue medical ID cards and Laddoo cards to the petitioners. 9 The learned Standing Counsel appearing for TTD would submit that she has no instructions with regard to practice of the issuance of the said cards. Having regard to the same, the liberty is granted to the petitioners to make application before the appropriate authorities of TTD seeking issuance of medical cards. Upon filing of such application, the concerned authority is directed to pass appropriate orders on the application filed by the petitioners within a period of three (3) months. ____________________________________ JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA Date:17.04.2025 MVK/ANI 10 190 THE HON’BLE SMT JUSTICE KIRANMAYEE MANDAVA WRIT PETITION No.4699 of 2022 Date:17.04.2025 ANI